Enterprise Library 3.1 is coming!


While I've been jetsetting around the world, in Redmond the Enterprise Library team has hard at work putting together the 3.1 release. Before you get too excited, this is really just a maintenance release addressing a small number of issues discovered since the release of 3.0. Here is a summary of the main changes:

Policy Injection Application Block

  • The default Remoting Policy Injector can now be replaced with alternative interception mechanisms via configuration without modifying the application block code
  • Call Handler attributes are now honored correctly when placed on interface methods
  • Fixed an issue that could cause duplicate handlers where matching rules matched both a class and its interface
  • Classes implementing COM interfaces (including those deriving from System.Windows.Forms.Form) can now be intercepted
  • TraceLogEntry class is now serializable, allowing it to be used with the MSMQ Trace Listener

Validation Application Block

  • Fixed an issue that prevented the PropertyComparisonValidator from working with the Windows Forms integration adapter
  • The message template for the PropertyComparisonValidator can now be saved using the configuration tools.

Data Access Application Block

  • Connection strings for OLEDB and ODBC connections can now be edited using custom dialog boxes from the configuration tools

Of these changes, the only brand new feature is the ability to replace the PIAB's interception mechanism without code changes. This is quite significant, since as Ed mentioned a while ago, there are quite a number of different ways to do interception, and different approaches may be appropriate for different applications. While we still only provide the remoting proxy mechanism in the "box", it will now be much easier to build different approaches, such as dynamically emitting inherited proxies. Of course, if you build such a beast, please consider contributing it to EntLib Contrib.

Since I'm no longer in Redmond I'm not sure exactly when Enterprise Library 3.1 will hit the streets, but it's definitely in the "real soon now" timeframe!

Comments (14)
  1. Sergio says:

    Will it install under Vista or will we continually get the 2869 error?  I can not install the latest SCSF due to the error and will most likely have to revert to Windows XP (which I can not tell you how much that would really suck, as I have more than one machine that I'd have to rebuild).

  2. Chris Tavares says:

    We have tested installing Entlib 3.1 under Vista, and haven't seen this error in our tests. Not saying it definately won't screw up on your box, but the signs are favorable.

  3. Guy says:

    With all the post about the EntLib Configuration Tool and still no updates. Is there going to be any attention given to the Type Selector?

    Is there going to still be issues with name validation when loading external .dll's?

    Is this the red head step child that no one want to touch. Even after the community give code to add better support it is just ignored.

    - guy

  4. Jeg har ikke set så meget omkring dette release andet end Toms lille heads-up . The patterns & practices

  5. avdean says:

    I would like so much to adopt the validation block, but there are so many problems with it when using configuration (I don't want to use attributes) that it is unusable.  For instance two major bugs are with resource files, so no localization support and you cannot use custom validators, so extending is unavailable.  Can you please make these fixes for 3.1?

  6. Enterprise Library 3.1 just Released: It is a maintenance release to fix a few bugs. It also includes

  7. Cool - the 3.1 maintenance release to Enterprise Library is available from MSDN, its creatively named

  8. INauseous() says:

    Enterprise Library 3.1 Released...

  9. A few updates to EntLib for the May 2007 releaes. Just released in April, the P&P team updates (bug

  10. Rob Archibald - Intel says:

    I second Guy's comments on the need to get name validation with external dll's fixed.  We're using Entlib 3.0 with VSTO and have more than once contemplated going back to 2.0 because we can't seem to get around the errors except by giving full trust to all our typed dll's AND the Microsoft Office directory.  Not exactly my idea of a good implementation so I'd love to see that fix.

  11. tomholl says:

    Guy and Rob - sorry if I missed a discussion on this before, but I'm not sure I know what problems you are talking about - could you please elaborate?

    Tom

  12. Вийшли багофікси до Enterprise Library 3.0, тепер ця бібліотека розповсюджується з версією 3.1. Ознайомитись

  13. shayke says:

    Hi,

    I am trying(no luck so far) loading the Entlib configuration dynamically from external resource(custom webservice). My custom webservice provides me the Entlib configuration as an XML(actually it is the App.config serialization), and i want to load this configuration without creating a local App.config Is'nt there any other easier way? Do i have to implement the section implementation for each section in the App.config,even if i do not work in a App.config manner???

    Regards Shay

  14. digitalego says:

    shayke:

    In the UI there is no easy way to open non-file configuration source, at the company I work for we had a brief talk to Tom about this, but I dont know if the changes required in the UI were made in 3.1.

    I would doubt it though, as Tom and gang were just about to release 3.0, they did fix some bugs we found though so cudos to them 🙂 Polymorphic Configuration being the most important.

    In short, do a search on the *.design.dll source for FileConfigurationSource, as this is the crux of the UI, you'll also have problems dynamically adding menu items to the configuration tool using the design managers...

    If IPO allows I'll be posting something after I bring a website up that goes over some truly great changes that extend the Ent Lib to a full-feature set with operations and maintainable configuration of applications. Might post this over on code-plex (though I prefer SVN).

Comments are closed.

Skip to main content